My comment is
----
It all boils down to what society is willing to enforce, the masses be ignorant as much as those in power so what then?

IMO from musing on it (albeit poorly musing on it) it all revolves around trying to make a profit, if it dose not make a profit then it can do no harm.

First and foremost we need a copyright office that has some depth to it and that is able to look at cases to reasonable pass/fail things before it goes to court, and then share its hopefully un biased knowledge with the court to help the process along.

After that we need ground rules on what exactly reasonable use/infringement and criminal activity is.

The whole process should be founded upon if its trying to make a profit or not, from there a 2 or 4 step pass fail setup to weed out whats what.

Trying to make a profit if fail its in the clear, if pass it moves onto the 4 or 5 main points of fair use, failing that means its infringement, the last one would be the smell test for criminal activity where you have made a profit of 5K or 00.1 of the IPs worth.

Using distribution as the standard to pass/fail infrigmeent/criminal activity on leads to nothing but a quagmire.